They are different methods to maximize the credibility and integrity of the vote counting process when initiating a voting procedure.
Some of them consist of counting ballots manually, mechanically and/or electronically. In each case, there is a balance between integrity, accuracy and speed. A common characteristic of these methods is to minimize opportunities for fraud and manipulation and ensuring that the public perception of the counting of votes is a simple, straightforward and non-partisan process.
A manual method, like the hand counter process, attempts to do the very best to be nonbiased and fair. Such a manual method has a degree of subjectivity that is an extremely important issue in a process where no subjectivity is allowed. Moreover, a manual method is not suitable for counting a large quantity of ballots quickly.
Today's trend of the voting process uses generally a computerized method for counting votes. Electronic and mechanical methods, whether mixed together or not, can provide an accurate and speedy vote count and announcement of results. Whereas such methods seem to offer a robust identification mechanism, numerous external situations can compromise the privacy of the voter as well as the counting process accuracy.
One computerized method consists in using a PC compatible with a touch screen especially packaged for voting, like the “Electrovote 2000” voting machine sold by Fidlar-Doubleday (formerly Fidlar and Chambers). Such a system includes a flat panel display screen on the voting machine that has a very poor off axis viewing, so the privacy is a bit better than the minimal booth suggests.
A more sophisticated system, PC based, incorporates a smartcard interface, like the “Global Election Systems Model 100 Electronic Ballot Station”. In use, the machine is enabled by entering an ID code on the screen corresponding to the polling place and each voter is given a smartcard that is available for one use. Even if using a smartcard avoids over voting in a voting machine similar to the “Electrovote 2000”, the system has a very poor off axis viewing. Furthermore, the smartcard is considered as a voter's token and does not contain any confidential data related to the candidate/party that minimizes considerably the solution interest.
Another system, based on direct recording electronic voting machines, incorporates push buttons with associated light, like the “Microvote Electronic Voting Computer”. The system consists of using push buttons adjacent to each ballot item to cast votes, with a light by each button giving positive feedback that the vote has been registered. Such a system contains only 64 buttons. Many voting processes, like elections, would require significantly more than this if the full ballot were to be displayed at once. The system can be extended for displaying more candidates by using a complex ballot paging. A better displaying on a single scroll, side by side is required to the voter that wants to work through the issues on the ballot that seems to be difficult to handle.
A standardized ballot, punched card based, was first used for vital statistics tabulation before adopted for voting process by using a “Votomatic” technology. The punched card contains a tabulation of pre-printed information representing a matrix of voting positions. Generally, in many systems that use a punched card method, the ballot is pre-scored at each voting position so that punching with a stylus through that position into an appropriate backing will remove a rectangle of chad, leaving a hole that is counted as a vote. Then, the ballot card is held in proper alignment and is inserted into a voting machine. The voting machine checks that a voted ballot paper is legitimate and deposits it in the ballot box for later countering. The counting machine does not recognize circling or underlining ballots and multiple votes are ignored.
Finally, the ballots are stacked for tabulation and processed by using either a computer equipped with a standard punched-card reader or by an electromechanical punched-card tabulating machine. Unfortunately, in some cases the punched card process may compromise the counting method accuracy.
Statistically a punched card may contain a dimple in a position instead of a cleanly punched hole. This is due to either a voter hesitation or a pre punched card failure. In addition, some punch positions on the ballot can be directly over internal braces, inside the voting machine mechanism, that can develop undesirable chad jams. The development of chad jams that are accumulated in areas where ballots are being processed may represent votes added to some candidates by accident. It is also possible to obtain a ballot that has a completely removed chad for one candidate but also has a chad with one corner punctured for another candidate in the same race. This ballot has to be counted as a vote. The presence of dimples and undesirable chads initiates a hand recount process and it is difficult for a human by looking a dimple or an incoherent chad to determine the voter's intent.
Some electronic voting machines allow voters to show their choices and stop them if they try to over vote. These machines allow voters to review their choices and ballots before turning them in. The name of candidates and the text of ballot questions are not printed on ballots that are based on a punch card method. This is a reason why some organizations switch from punch cards to optical scan, in which voters fill in ovals with a pencil. In certain circumstance, it is possible to twist a ballot. Twisting a ballot can produce several “votes” on a punch card ballot that has already been counted by machines three or more times that is considered as over voting. In this case, over voting invalidates the vote.
To summarize, the aforementioned voting systems and methods present several drawbacks. Some of the main drawbacks are as follows.
A manual method, like the hand counter process, has a degree of subjectivity that is unacceptable in such a voting process. Moreover, a hand counter process is not appropriate when counting a large quantity of ballots and is subject to mistakes, such as over voting and/or any ballot rigging, that a skilled person in the art can easily imagine.
A touch screen electronic computerized method compromises the privacy of the voter when using a flat panel display screen on the voting machine that has a very poor off axis viewing.
A system based on push buttons is too difficult to be manipulated easily by a voter.
A computerized method, punched card based, when applying in a large range of ballots, generates undesirable chads. The difficulty to recognize a legitimate ballot when some undesirable chads appear on the card and a necessity to hand recount ballots when a ballot fails in conformity are time consuming in a process that needs to provide results quickly.
As mentioned above, prior art solutions make the existing methods not fully appropriated to achieve an efficient vote counting process while guarantying full integrity, preventing ballot rigging, and allowing full audit.
The present invention offers a solution to solve the aforementioned problems.